Goodbye, Columbus Day
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
PRAGER UNIVERSITY: Even though it remains a national holiday, many cities no longer celebrate Columbus Day. They celebrate Indigenous Peoples Day instead. What’s behind the switch? Contrary to what you might think, it’s not about paying homage to America’s original inhabitants. Steven Crowder, host of Louder with Crowder, explains.
STEVEN CROWDER: Thanksgiving. Independence Day. Memorial Day.
Holidays are a great time to riddle Americans with needless, oppressive guilt.
But the one that stands head and shoulders above the rest is Columbus Day—the day where progressives indoctrinate your children into believing Columbus to be Satan incarnate, the USA to be his evil spawn, and the Native Americans to be pacifists. And so now we have “Indigenous Peoples Day” or, as it would have been named thirty years ago, “Aboriginals Day,” or, as it would have been named ten or fifteen years ago, “Native Americans Day,” or, as it could be named tomorrow in Canada, “First Nations Peoples Day.”
Feeling the urge to self-inflict grievous bodily harm yet? That’s only natural, because the whole charade has become an exercise in hating Western civilization, which is really just an exercise in hating yourself.
First, as far as Columbus goes, the guy deserves some credit, right? Flawed, to be sure, but he was the greatest navigator of his age—the first person to cross the Atlantic from the continent of Europe. And he did so without any maps and only three small ships. If you can name them, by the way, comment below, as I’m sure your professor can’t.
But your professor probably has taught you the tale of Columbus as a villain, usually as a starting off point to indict the United States as a whole, often relying on a few key myths and some pivotal lies by omission.
So, to start with, I’ll bet that you probably believe Columbus and other European settlers to simply have committed mass genocide against Native Americans…sorry; Indigenous.
But here’s the truth: While there were many examples of brutal warfare between Europeans and Native Americans, neither side actually committed genocide; in fact, there was never an outright policy of Indian extermination.
The Native Americans were mostly wiped out through infectious diseases that the settlers had inadvertently brought with them. Of the estimated 250,000 natives in Hispaniola, Columbus's first stop in the Americas in 1492, new infectious diseases wiped out a staggering 95% of their population by 1517.
As far as the genocide by violence, you can look at any historical account of even the most one-sided battles and find that they were still just that—battles. Take Wounded Knee (although hundreds of years later, I only bring it up because I know that if I don’t, you will). It’s become ubiquitous with the idea of Native Americans’ genocide. After all, there were 150-350 Aboriginals killed or wounded. That’s terrible, but there were also 25 American soldiers killed and 39 wounded. That’s not genocide; that’s a one-sided beatdown with Old Glory wielding the hammer.
And sometimes the “massacres” went the other direction. See the Apaches for reference, or the Comanches, or a dozen or so other tribes. So, the natives often gave as good as they got—not exactly the way genocide usually tends to work.
Here’s another thing I bet you’ve been made to believe: that many Native Americans…sorry; American Indians…sorry; Idon’tknowwhat-takeyourpick lived in harmony with the environment until Columbus arrived, and European settlers destroyed the land with their evil technology.
Truth? Not only did the Natives brutally take out PEOPLE, but they took out entire forests and hunted species to extinction.
Squatting Bear and his First Nations buddies weren’t hopping into kayaks to block whaling ships, probably because they were too busy killing seals to waterproof their kayaks.
You also probably believe that the Native American…sorry; Two-Spirited-First Nations-something-or-other culture was a beautiful, pantheistic one of peace.
The truth is... not so much. When Columbus arrived, the islands were inhabited by two main tribes: the Arawaks, who were passive and friendly, and the Caribs, who were vicious cannibals. The Arawaks actually lived in fear of the Caribs for—you guessed it—the reasons being that they hunted them down to enslave them and eat them. Yes—eat them. Ironically, we get the name “Caribbean Islands” from those famous people-eaters.
The only way settlers were able to conquer this land was through the help of Native Americans who teamed up with them to settle the score with other tribes who were even bigger jerks than they were!
That’s not even to mention the populations in Central and South America, famous for ritual human sacrifice. You think Cortes was able to command and conquer with only 500 or so Conquistadors? Of course not! It took 50,000 screaming, ANGRY allied natives who’d had it up to here with being tortured, enslaved and forced to carry gold for the other native Aztecs. At some point, they decided to roll the dice and go with the guys sporting funny beards and metal hats.
None of this is to say that the early settlers were perfect, or that they didn’t carry out their fair share of pretty scummy stuff. But to use America’s mistakes as the brush with which to paint the entirety of its history while completely ignoring the indigenous lifestyle of barbarism and borderline evil is inaccurate at best, dishonest at worst. There were plenty of bloody, horrendous battles between the Europeans and the Indians. When a Neolithic tribe encounters a more technologically advanced people, the guys with the boom-boom sticks usually win.
Columbus is not the issue here, and never was. This whole “Indigenous Peoples Day” charade is about teaching your children to despise Western civilization and anybody who dare defend it.
But then again, that could just be my Western civ privilege talking.
Happy Columbus Day, ya filthy animals.
Tags
Who is online
87 visitors
Alt-right gadfly and "funnyman" Steven Crowder gives us the mental midget version of Columbus Day and American Indian history post European "settlement".
I am not an expert on this issue by any means, but I think I know that Wounded Knee became a symbol of the "genocide" of the Indians, not because of the number of dead Indians, but because it represented one of the last stands of the natives as they (what was left of them) were being pushed completely off their tribal lands.
The nitwit Crowder acts as if this "battle" was something sought by both sides and fought between equal sized and equipped forces. It's an idiotic comment, but then, almost all of his video is idiiotic.
Hmmmm? Sounds like this guy is clueless about the Younger Dryas. Maybe the black mat might ring a bell?
Oh, by the way the first peoples, just like every other people on the planet battled each other.
Other than trying to minimize the loss of millions of lives and the destruction of first peoples documentation, what is his point?
His point is that the Indians lost and "we" won.
He could have just stated that, as what you say is arguably true. Instead, he spent many words to minimize the loss of culture and millions of lives.
For many many years Americans, including schoolchildren, were taught a one sided version of American history concerning the Indians , and people like Columbus. When I was a kid there was no criticism of Columbus, at least not in public view. Likewise there was little negativity about the expansion of the Europeans across the continent. Everyone was taught that Custer was a hero who was unmercifully massacred by savages.
It is not surprising that when the truth began to be seen by more and more people, there would be protests against honoring a figure like Columbus.
I understand John. I was raised in a "white world". I grew up with the same background. My paternal Grandfather was full blooded Cherokee. Note the term "full blooded" has all kind of connotations these days. My paternal Grandmother was an unknown amount Algonquin. I am still trying to figure it out.
Family history divided our heritage from us for much of my younger life. As I got older, my Dad and I began researching.
I have learned so much. Do you know the first peoples had libraries? Observatories that resemble ours? More accurate calendars? Light houses? And, among other things, beer thousands of years ago?
This is a wonderful time for archeology and discovery.
And, if I'm correct, wasn't it the first people who used zero as a number making it possible express the number 10? Well, not really, I was looking it up when I started this but, the first people did start using it about 36 B.C.
The Mesoamerican Long Count calendar developed in south-central Mexico and Central America required the use of zero as a place-holder within its vigesimal (base-20) positional numeral system. Many different glyphs, including this partial quatrefoil——were used as a zero symbol for these Long Count dates, the earliest of which (on Stela 2 at Chiapa de Corzo, Chiapas) has a date of 36 BC.[a]
Yes, they had the zero concept. Independently, the Arabs also did.
of course, others may have as well. We only know what "we' have discovered.
I am sure the ancient hunters and gatherers had a way to express when they did get anything.
It is a shame the glyphs are what mostly remains of the ancient writings.
The priest Diego de Landa Calderón destroyed most of the libraries.
I heard something on one of those Discovery channel shows that there was proof that the South American and, Central American first peoples had a trade route to the North American peoples, they traded Maze with them all the way up into Michigan before Columbus arrived for many century's, it would be great if we could find a cash of writings from that time period.
Yes, there were trade routes across many areas.
Wonderful civilizations and cultures that were never taught in schools.
Most documentation was destroyed. It was of "the devil".
Galen - if you get the chance, read two of Jack Weatherford's books - "Native Roots" and "Indian Givers" - and also Charles Mann's "1491" - excellent trove of treasure.
I'll see if I can find them.
Yes, anything at the time that didn't have the stamp of approval by the church was "of the devil". Idiots.
It was interesting reading the diary of one conquistador who was part of the take over of the Incas region. Can not remember his name. He could not believe how well mannered and organized the civilization was. He actually felt remorse and guilt because he knew what he was bringing there was less, as a civilization, than what the Inca had.
It was the case of the savages conquering the civilized. Truly sad what was lost.
The Natives used their metallurgy for ornaments rather than weapons and had not experienced such things as small pox and measles, etc.
The focus of where they spent their creativity and lack of certain immunities were key reasons to their fall to the Spanish.
Montezuma ?
Montezuma, actually, Montezuma II, if to Anglicize it, was the last Aztec King.
I am pretty sure this fella was just a lowly Captain under Pizzaro.
We need at least one holiday a month, I like reasons or excuses to celebrate
I think beer is the most ancient thing worth celebrating. Recent findings infer beer was the driving factor to the rise of agriculture.
beer was the driving factor to the rise of agriculture.
.
ill drink to that
Hell, ill drink till I become some agricultural vegetable,
I don't care
back to Columbus, I remember those knights
left me in a daze
,
they aint making holidays like they used to.
great sales on those 3 ships and department stores as well
.
just another Capitalism ploy imho
As Homer Simpson once said: "To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems."
What a visionary!
Keep posting!
It was safer than drinking "fresh" water...
Exactly right!!!
Oktoberfest should be adopted as a national holiday. So should Halloween. Get rid of Columbus Day and Labor Day. We can keep Memorial and Veterans Day.
Oktoberfest is something I can understand and get into with Gusto, even as a child Columbus Day seemed lame and kind of pointless
Especially given the actual history surrounding Columbus.
OK as a teacher, this is such utter BS, from Prager U that I am just sitting here smh. Thanks to John I have the transcript.
Huh?
Started teaching in 1987. It was never called “Indigenous Peoples Day”, “Aboriginals Day,” or “Native Americans Day". It was always called Columbus Day. And no we never taught that "Columbus to be Satan incarnate", but a very brutal man, who committed murder and took slaves against Queen Isabella's wishes.
Um. no. The point was history. Facts. Race had nada to do with the discussion.
Again, this guy kind of comes up short on history. Columbus was not the greatest navigator of his age, especially since he thought he made it to India. And most northern Europeans who knew anything knew that the Vikings were the first to find the new world. Leif Eriksson was here about 500 years before Columbus. Imagine that? A fair-haired Norseman. We should be celebrating him instead. Nice touch about what the professors would know... (rolls eyes).
If you are learning about this in college, you better find a new college. This is elementary and middle school learning.
Wait.. I thought we were talking about Columbus. But really that is not what this is about. This is a propaganda piece about why no one should feel bad about what happened to Indians here. Define outright policy of Indian extermination? Does he mean that the US gov was not Nazi Germany with death camps? Well, no they didn't have that.
Then he goes into a whole mishmash of various items. Yes, many indigenous people died more from disease than were outright killed. They were also helped later on with blankets that were covered with smallpox, supplied by the US gov. Then nothing beats making fun of "Wounded Knee" because the Calvery had guns. and the Indians didn't, which isn't even close to the truth. The Indians did have guns. Most versions of the story revolve around a tribe member named Black Coyote and his gun going off as the start of the massacre. The reason the massacre happened was a numbers game, armed U.S. Cavalry vs some men men, and mostly women and children.
OK the guy be tripping. Columbus day has to do with the evils of European tech?
Did Indians fight among themselves? Sure. No one said they didn't. But I am confused.. were we not talking about Columbus? Of course not.
And only the US gov had public hunts of buffalo to near extinction, which was one way of cutting off food supply to the Indians. And nowhere did Indians cut down forests. They counted on them for living. And let's finish that statement off with an insulting "Squatting Bear", 'cause this guy doesn't have a chip on his shoulder over something.. although I am not sure if it's about Columbus or Indians
I would continue, but he just basically somehow goes round and round in the hope that most of you out there don't know the actual true history. The one that has been known and taught for over the last 75 years or more.. long before people called the truth a lie for an agenda.
And let's be clear, I don't care if we celebrate Columbus day and not Leif Eriksson day, (personally, I like the Vikings better and it is more accurate), but let's not pretend that was what this Prager U video was about.
So basically, I stand by this:
Pretty much so, Dave, but using a present hot-button issue to confuse the point.
Maybe I missed the hot button.
I have a tendency to read through that bs.
That you did
Yep, all I could see was lost culture and millions of lives gone and a bunch of bs words diminishing all of that.
Trick I learned when very young.
See Target.
Acquire Target.
Kill Target.
Everything else is bs.
It took me too many years to learn that and all the real stuff I learned (from all sources) didn't come together till I retired and had time to just think about whatever came to mind. I'm old but a little smarter and happier now
Makes decision making so simple, especially under high stress conditions.
Block out the bs and get the target.
I was too busy making a living to have time for it all to come together
and time in my garden and with my dogs helped bring things together
I understand.
Fortunately, I was able to take early shooting lessons and apply in a broader spectrum. It became natural way to approach things.
These are the good ol' days.
My father taught me to shoot .22 and skill to use power saw, garden things and many things at a young age but they were all disconnected skills that didn't fit together.
Shooting teaches both a skill and a life lesson,
I come from a family of snipers. All on the Native side.
I learned to shoot before I attended school. By the time I was 12 (? maybe 13?) I was the family marksman.
It taught me to shut everything out and focus.
Funny, very rarely have I fully loaded a magazine in a high powered rifle. Just one in the chamber.
I have described it here, there was that time a bull from the farm across the road got loose and chased my little sister and cousins. I was an early teen, if that. So a year or two ago...
Ran into my grandparents house, shouted to my Dad, grabbed my rifle and bag full of loaded stripper clips. I jam one of those clips into the magazine (springs pop out of heads not knowing the difference between clips and magazines) and Dad's yelling DONT SHOOT THE BULL.
LOL.
Oh hell yeah, I knew my target. One time and one time only, I let the outside noise stop me.
All was fine.
As young wood cutter I loved it. Worked with my Dad every chance I got, because I loved the chainsaws. To this day I still have a Husky CD 2100. That's a hot rod.
LOL
Some of our more audacious young conservative commentators today are not happy with just defending Columbus' honor around Columbus Day, they feel compelled to defend and even praise the course of the white Europeans overtaking the width of the North American continent. The "battle" is not just about the initial exploration , it is also and maybe more importantly about the entirety of the displacement of the indigenous by the whites. A Columbus day sad casts a shadow of disapproval across the history of the Europeans interactions with the natives, from the Caribbean to the pacific Northwest, and Steven Crowder and the like are having none of it.
We can't go back and change history, but we should at least all be willing to be honest about it.
Exactly.
Neither side should. there was great brutality on both sides, also great humanity. Unfortunately the baser side of humanity took precedence over the better half.
Two conflicting cultures both as much similar as they were different.
AS far as columbus and his three tubs go, he was lucky to make it, even luckier to make it back. he wasn't adding anything except the knowledge that the land mass to the east was one hell of a lot larger than anyone before him thought.
Yes they brought disease, which killed a lot of natives who didn't have protection from it. and in general they treated the natives very badly, is there any wonder that the natives didn't like them? no. I guarantee that if someone tried the same thing today, most americans would take a dim view on those making the attempt.
The French I believe had the most magnanimous relationships with the natives, not always friendly mind you, not no specific intent to rid the territory of their presence. the British on the other hand, perpetrated some very sickening things against the natives. like the aforementioned biological warfare. And yes, the US government took some of those same pages out of history.
But both sides were intractable, and neither side was willing to budge an inch and honest history teaches us that at some point one side will win out over the other. Right, Wrong or Inbetween. Yes the Europeans won out in the overall scheme of things.
Does that mean the natives are not worthy individuals or a people that are less than human of course not and it is the small brain that believes otherwise. They fought for their lifestyle, lives and heritage, families, tribes and societies, just the same as we would today if faced with the same set of circumstances.
Should Columbus be celebrated for something that was eventually going to be done anyway? Simply cause he was the first?
Acknowledge him then leave him to the annals of history I say, he has as much to do with today's world as I do with his...
Which is none.
Yeah - and one of the "facts" he presents - 250,000 Indigenous folks in Hispania who were killed. Actually, the number is closer to 3M, just in the islands. Doesn't take into account the Arawak, Siboni, Carib and other tribes who were killed for not being Christian in the neighborhood of 7M folks - and that's just in the Caribbean.
The more that is discovered, the more the real numbers are coming to the surface in the mainstream.
He appears to actually have been going for Japan, but knew he had come up short and was in an entirely new place. He didn't think he was in India. He thought he was at islands off the coast of Japan.
Most estimates are around 90%, which is a pretty significant figure.
This appears to have been a British idea and not suggested before the middle of the 18th century - some 250 years after Columbus. Also, there's no evidence it was ever actually tried.
Though Columbus's expeditions introduced smallpox and other diseases to the Americas, they spread through the continents naturally within the first 100 years, well before there was any significant white settlement.
Sure, but it's not historically significant. The vikings were in Greenland for a few centuries but their only foray beyond that was a settlement in Newfoundland that lasted about a year. Basically, they cut some timber and went home. In contrast, Columbus began a permanent connection between Europe and the Americas. His achievement is far more significant if you are studying American history. The vikings have cooler headwear, but they are legitimately no more than a footnote in the opening of the West. Essentially, nothing came of their efforts.
There is a request for reimbursement for British officers who gave smallpox infected 'gifts' to the Delaware Chiefs.
No. He was looking for a short cut to China and India. That is why he called the natives "Indians" as opposed to the Indians of India.
That is true in S. America. He still was pretty brutal to the natives that he took back and later hid again against Queen Isabella's request.
While you are not wrong that the English did that ( I didn't cover that):
There were other accounts of it being done much later.
Actually not true. They settled in Greenland and stayed for over 500 years. This has been proved archeologically. The difference was that they eventually blended with the indigenous people. In fact, they got as far as N. America, in L’Anse aux Meadows, but that outpost didn't last.
I will grant you that Columbus's findings made that lasting link that was the beginning of most of the rest of Europe's exploration here for economic values as opposed to Leif Erikson, who did it for the adventure. (google who discovered N. America and you will see it is him), but if you need someone Columbus like, then we should be celebrating John Cabot day for finding what is now Canada or Verrazzano for finding what is now the US.
Hey stop copying me before I get my ideas down, LOL!
Whether the smallpox blanket thing was ever actually carried out successfully, it 1) Could, at best, only have been responsible for a relatively small percentage of deaths (since 90% of the native population was wiped out by disease the old fashioned way) and 2) Had nothing whatsoever to do with Columbus. It shouldn't even be in a conversation about him.
Didn't I say basically that?
Yes, and "the noble island of Cipangu," which they learned about from Marco Polo, was going to be his headquarters for that enterprise. Cipangu = Japan. I'm guessing Italians probably pronounce that something like "Chipangu," which is reasonably close to Japan.
That's also why Columbus thought he might find gold there. Polo described Cipangu as being full of the stuff. The "Indies" was what Europeans called east Asia generally. In the 15th century, they weren't being picky about China vs. India. So anyone he would have encountered, would have been an "Indian" to Columbus.
Marco Polo's journeys were blended and extrapolated on, but being that he did this for business, he did know the difference between the items made on the silk highway and the people who made them.
Japan, on the other hand, was not "discovered" until 1543 by the Portuguese. Columbus might have thought he found Asia major or minor, but he didn't even know about Japan.
Ah, sorry, yes you did.
Nina
Pinto
Santa Maria
Wow, louder with Crowder, what an ass hat,
Praeger U, more mythology about creationism and the European white man as a victim....smh
John - thanks for the thread
Columbus is a historically significant figure and should be taught. He was by no means a perfect man (though by comparison, I think he holds up well. See: Cortez, Pizarro), but much of the negative things said about him these days are politically motivated and outright false. Though he may have been inappropriately lionized in previous generations, the pendulum has swung too far the other way and now he is irrationally demonized.
I don't think we need to have a holiday on his behalf, but changing it to Indigenous People's Day or something similar is a mistake. Not that I don't support such a day. In fact, I do. I think it would be fine. But as it stands now, the Indigenous People's Days are all about hating Columbus, not celebrating native people. If cities and states want to celebrate native people, let's do that, but let's give the holiday it's own day and not make it some angry thing that really focuses on a white man instead of the native people.
I agree it shouldn't be a hate day, but should be taught in TRUTH.
I go back to my earlier inference.
It should be BEER DAY, as beer was an ancient commonality shared between both the old world and new world.
LOL.. ditto.
I send you a NT beer chip (do we have such a thing?)
Ditto +1
Unlike Star Trak, Columbus was not subject to The Prime Directive and I don't think the Kings of Europe gave a rat's ass about Indians
Bingo!!!!
You're triggering the nerd in me.
we have something in common
So does that make Columbus the Klingons of exploration?
A European King with half the attitude and honor of a Klingon would have ruled the Old World and most of the New World years sooner unless Romulans or old religions got in the way
It would be a different place now, for sure
asses pup tlhoS Hoch Huch law' Hoch Suq teH 'ach chaH.
universal translator is off line here but I think I agree
The King's of Europe were TOLD by the Catholic Church - go forth and kill if they don't kneel down to our religion. And the killing was done in accordance with Catholic doctrine.
Several papal decrees, known as “bulls,” were issued in the 1400s to legitimize the domination and destruction of non-Christian people. Those decrees, embraced by the early European colonizers of the Americas, formed the basis of U.S. Indian policy, which allowed the government to seize Indian land, remove its people, and control their personal and property rights.
Specifically, the Spanish Requiremento states what the Catholic Church, through the Euro leaders, directed the Conquistadores to do:
"One of these Pontiffs, who succeeded that St. Peter as Lord of the world, in the dignity and seat which I have before mentioned, made donation of these isles and Tierra-firme to the aforesaid King and Queen and to their successors, our lords, with all that there are in these territories, as is contained in certain writings which passed upon the subject as aforesaid, which you can see if you wish. So their Highnesses are kings and lords of these islands and land of Tierra-firme by virtue of this donation: and some islands, and indeed almost all those to whom this has been notified, have received and served their Highnesses, as lords and kings, in the way that subjects ought to do, with good will, without any resistance, immediately, without delay, when they were informed of the aforesaid facts. And also they received and obeyed the priests whom their Highnesses sent to preach to them and to teach them our Holy Faith ; and all these, of their own free will , without any reward or condition, have become Christians, and are so, and their Highnesses have joyfully and benignantly received them, and also have commanded them to be treated as their subjects and vassals ; and you too are held and obliged to do the same. Wherefore, as best we can, we ask and require you that you consider what we have said to you, and that you take the time that shall be necessary to understand and deliberate upon it, and that you acknowledge the Church as the Ruler and Superior of the whole world, and the high priest called Pope , and in his name the King and Queen Doña Juana our lords, in his place, as superiors and lords and kings of these islands and this Tierra-firme by virtue of the said donation, and that you consent and give place that these religious fathers should declare and preach to you the aforesaid. If you do so, you will do well, and that which you are obliged to do to their Highnesses, and we in their name shall receive you in all love and charity, and shall leave you, your wives, and your children, and your lands, free without servitude, that you may do with them and with yourselves freely that which you like and think best, and they shall not compel you to turn Christians, unless you yourselves, when informed of the truth, should wish to be converted to our Holy Catholic Faith , as almost all the inhabitants of the rest of the islands have done. And, besides this, their Highnesses award you many privileges and exemptions and will grant you many benefits. But, if you do not do this, and maliciously make delay in it, I certify to you that, with the help of God, we shall powerfully enter into your country, and shall make war against you in all ways and manners that we can, and shall subject you to the yoke and obedience of the Church and of their Highnesses; we shall take you and your wives and your children, and shall make slaves of them, and as such shall sell and dispose of them as their Highnesses may command; and we shall take away your goods, and shall do you all the mischief and damage that we can , as to vassals who do not obey, and refuse to receive their lord, and resist and contradict him; and we protest that the deaths and losses which shall accrue from this are your fault, and not that of their Highnesses, or ours, nor of these cavaliers who come with us. And that we have said this to you and made this Requisition , we request the notary here present to give us his testimony in writing, and we ask the rest who are present that they should be witnesses of this Requisition."It seems Those who want to abolish Columbus Day should redirect their anger to the Catholic Church